Is F1 on the path to Armageddon?

F1 is now ticking off the days to what well might be a high octane version of Armageddon which could be coming the sport’s way on 12 June.&nbsp; That’s the day on which FIA president Max Mosley will be announcing just who has been accepted to contest the 2010 world championship.
So who will it be? Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull, Renault, Toro Rosso, Force India, BMW Sauber, Brawn and Toyota? Or will it be Williams, Prodrive, Lola, Litespeed, Campos or Superfund? Or a thinly diluted mix of both groups?

F1 is now ticking off the days to what well might be a high octane version of Armageddon which could be coming the sport’s way on 12 June. That’s the day on which FIA president Max Mosley will be announcing just who has been accepted to contest the 2010 world championship.

So who will it be? Ferrari, McLaren, Red Bull, Renault, Toro Rosso, Force India, BMW Sauber, Brawn and Toyota? Or will it be Williams, Prodrive, Lola, Litespeed, Campos or Superfund? Or a thinly diluted mix of both groups?

Well, of course, the conclusion one draws will be based on two firm premises. Namely, whether you choose to believe that the ‘stand off’ between the established teams and the FIA over cost capping is just a set-piece confrontation, a typical slice of F1 window dressing intended simply to strengthen the value of the ‘franchises’ of those long-serving organisations.

Or you may choose to believe that, in a maverick moment, Mosley could just press the nuclear button, tell the sport’s most famous names to take a long walk on a short pier, and reinvent budget F1 with a bunch of novices, newcomers and nonentities. A bit like he did when he was one of the founding fathers of the March team, in fact, way back in 1970.

I was interested to read that Ferrari team chief Stefano Domenicali claimed that Ferrari was “staying true to their principles” by being part of the FOTA ‘conditional entry’ for the 2010 world championship which was submitted to the FIA last week.

He stated that “the entries will only be valid if the Concorde agreement is signed and if the regulations will be those currently in use, but modified as per FOTA’s suggestions.”

Over the past few weeks it has been difficult to discern precisely who is in the driving seat as far as this dispute is concerned. The only thing that has become clear to me is that costs in this business have now well and truly spiralled so far out of control that even the FIA’s recent, seemingly sane, initiative on the matter is in danger of going down the pan. Taken just as a temporary measure for a single year a 100m euro budget cap is utterly ludicrous. Have FOTA and the FIA both been spending too much time out in the sun?

Peter, you do get what Ferrari are saying though, do you? What insanity would it be to have two levels of contributors: one who spends £40 million and can have all manner of mods, and one who spends £140 million but must obey the modification rules? I can see both sides of the argument, but all the teams have to agree, otherwise it's dictatorship. Strange that, coming from Mosley.

For to long have the bullies in the playground ran F1 too suit themselves,now that the playing field is not so steep they don't like it!.If the big teams don't like it,go do something else!.It's like MP's expenses,now that budgets are going to be reduced,more transparent and that we the public are watching more closely,they're not going to be able too spend they're way to the top.

I'm going to stick my neck out and vote that Mosley will indeed go nuclear. I reckon they want fresh blood and lower budgets. I'm going to guess Ferrari and others will be ousted. And who do we think Mosley will vote for in the EU elections on Thursday? Ooh, too easy.

Sadly, it is looking like the positions of FOTA and the FIA are becoming entrenched.

If only they would step back and take a deep breath, they might see that their hopes and aspirations for F1 aren’t that different.

Despite the fact that F1 grids are closer than they ever have been, it is still very difficult for a £70m team (Force India) to score a single point in a season. Grids have fallen from 26 cars to 20 and may fall further without changes.

Ultimately, what all sides want is

26 car grids.

£40m budget teams to be competitive (but not artificially dominant).

Exciting racing for spectators.

A combination of unpredictability in individual races but the best team ultimately winning the championship.

Profitability for all teams.

The trouble with the FOTA proposals is that they don’t go far enough to make a £40m team genuinely competitive.

The trouble with the FIA proposals is that a budget cap is impossible to police fairly.

Is the championship result going to be declared 2 months after the last race, when the accountants have done their audits?

Is a team which already has it’s own wind tunnel or test track going to be saddled with it’s full costs even if they can hardly use it? Or if they rent it out profitably, will that allow them to spend the extra income?

Will the new teams have to lease all their equipment to avoid the full purchase cost coming out of the Year 1 budget?

If the FIA has more applicants than places, then surely it is not going to consider conditional entries over unconditional ones, which could herald a shakeup and the exclusion of some established outfits.

It would be interesting to know if the selection criteria the FIA use are at all formalised, and transparent? Or will it be playground politics - choices based on who Max likes and doesn't like this week...?